4.5.19: Scenario 18 – Stakeholder Frustration and Loss of Confidence
- Page ID
- 54824
\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\dsum}{\displaystyle\sum\limits} \)
\( \newcommand{\dint}{\displaystyle\int\limits} \)
\( \newcommand{\dlim}{\displaystyle\lim\limits} \)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)
\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)
\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\(\newcommand{\longvect}{\overrightarrow}\)
\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)
\(\newcommand{\avec}{\mathbf a}\) \(\newcommand{\bvec}{\mathbf b}\) \(\newcommand{\cvec}{\mathbf c}\) \(\newcommand{\dvec}{\mathbf d}\) \(\newcommand{\dtil}{\widetilde{\mathbf d}}\) \(\newcommand{\evec}{\mathbf e}\) \(\newcommand{\fvec}{\mathbf f}\) \(\newcommand{\nvec}{\mathbf n}\) \(\newcommand{\pvec}{\mathbf p}\) \(\newcommand{\qvec}{\mathbf q}\) \(\newcommand{\svec}{\mathbf s}\) \(\newcommand{\tvec}{\mathbf t}\) \(\newcommand{\uvec}{\mathbf u}\) \(\newcommand{\vvec}{\mathbf v}\) \(\newcommand{\wvec}{\mathbf w}\) \(\newcommand{\xvec}{\mathbf x}\) \(\newcommand{\yvec}{\mathbf y}\) \(\newcommand{\zvec}{\mathbf z}\) \(\newcommand{\rvec}{\mathbf r}\) \(\newcommand{\mvec}{\mathbf m}\) \(\newcommand{\zerovec}{\mathbf 0}\) \(\newcommand{\onevec}{\mathbf 1}\) \(\newcommand{\real}{\mathbb R}\) \(\newcommand{\twovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\ctwovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\threevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cthreevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\mattwo}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{rr}#1 \amp #2 \\ #3 \amp #4 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\laspan}[1]{\text{Span}\{#1\}}\) \(\newcommand{\bcal}{\cal B}\) \(\newcommand{\ccal}{\cal C}\) \(\newcommand{\scal}{\cal S}\) \(\newcommand{\wcal}{\cal W}\) \(\newcommand{\ecal}{\cal E}\) \(\newcommand{\coords}[2]{\left\{#1\right\}_{#2}}\) \(\newcommand{\gray}[1]{\color{gray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\lgray}[1]{\color{lightgray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\rank}{\operatorname{rank}}\) \(\newcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\col}{\text{Col}}\) \(\renewcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\nul}{\text{Nul}}\) \(\newcommand{\var}{\text{Var}}\) \(\newcommand{\corr}{\text{corr}}\) \(\newcommand{\len}[1]{\left|#1\right|}\) \(\newcommand{\bbar}{\overline{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bhat}{\widehat{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bperp}{\bvec^\perp}\) \(\newcommand{\xhat}{\widehat{\xvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\vhat}{\widehat{\vvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\uhat}{\widehat{\uvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\what}{\widehat{\wvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\Sighat}{\widehat{\Sigma}}\) \(\newcommand{\lt}{<}\) \(\newcommand{\gt}{>}\) \(\newcommand{\amp}{&}\) \(\definecolor{fillinmathshade}{gray}{0.9}\)Scenario 18 – Stakeholder Frustration and Loss of Confidence
Scenario Context
Following the architectural refactoring effort, Project Reckon has experienced:
-
Regression defects
-
Reduced velocity
-
Increased QA cycles
-
Additional schedule pressure
While these effects were expected to some degree, they have now become visible to internal stakeholders.
Several stakeholders who participated in RC1 validation sessions have raised concerns regarding:
-
System stability
-
Perceived regression in quality
-
Delays in expected improvements
The issue is no longer limited to technical performance.
It is now affecting confidence in the project’s direction.
Email from Julie Rama
Subject: Stakeholder Feedback – Stability Concerns
Hi,
I wanted to share an update following recent stakeholder feedback sessions.
1. Feedback Summary
Several stakeholders have raised concerns regarding:
-
Increased instability in areas that were previously functioning
-
Delays in expected improvements to reporting and usability
-
Perception that the system is “moving backward” rather than improving
2. Current Status
-
Velocity: 84% of baseline
-
Defects: 28 open (3 high severity, regression-related)
-
QA effort: significantly increased
-
Schedule: further delay now projected
3. Observations
While we understand that refactoring introduces temporary disruption, stakeholder expectations appear to be focused on visible improvement rather than structural correction.
There is growing concern that:
-
Too much change is being introduced at once
-
Stability is not being maintained during improvement efforts
4. Vendor Perspective
We believe the current trajectory is still correct from a technical standpoint.
However, we recognize the need to better align with stakeholder expectations and restore confidence.
5. Request
Please advise how you would like to proceed in terms of:
-
Stabilization vs continued refactoring
-
Communication to stakeholders
-
Managing expectations moving forward
Best,
Julie
Internal Stakeholder Feedback (Excerpt)
“The system was working better two weeks ago than it is now. I understand improvements are being made, but from a user perspective, things feel less stable.”
“We expected progress after RC1, but instead we are seeing more issues.”
Attachment A – Performance Snapshot
| Metric | Status |
|---|---|
| Velocity | 84% baseline |
| Defects | Increasing (regression-driven) |
| QA Effort | High |
| Schedule | Further delay emerging |
Student Assignment
You are the Project Manager at C-Bay.
The project is now experiencing:
-
Technical instability
-
Stakeholder frustration
-
Loss of confidence
-
Increasing delivery pressure
You must determine:
-
Whether to stabilize immediately
-
Whether to continue improvement efforts
-
How to restore stakeholder confidence
-
How to manage communication without undermining the team
Prepare a formal written response to Julie Rama.
Required Submission Structure
Your memorandum must include:
1️⃣ Executive Position
-
Is the project still under control?
-
Is stakeholder concern justified?
-
What is your immediate priority: stability or continued improvement?
2️⃣ Stability vs Progress Decision
-
Should refactoring continue?
-
Should the system be stabilized first?
-
Should changes be slowed or phased differently?
3️⃣ Stakeholder Management Strategy
-
How will you respond to stakeholder frustration?
-
What message will you communicate?
-
How will you rebuild confidence?
4️⃣ Vendor Alignment Strategy
-
How will you align ZynoxDev with stakeholder expectations?
-
How will you adjust execution approach without undermining vendor confidence?
5️⃣ Schedule & Delivery Position
-
Is further delay acceptable?
-
Should schedule expectations be reset?
-
Should delivery milestones be redefined?
6️⃣ Risk Assessment
Identify and evaluate:
-
Stakeholder confidence risk
-
System instability risk
-
Delivery risk
-
Reputation risk
Assign likelihood and impact.
7️⃣ Directive to ZynoxDev
Provide a clear directive, such as:
-
Pause refactoring and prioritize system stabilization
-
Focus on resolving regression defects immediately
-
Limit new changes until stability is restored
-
Introduce phased improvement approach
-
Develop stakeholder-facing stabilization plan
Learning Focus
Scenario 18 introduces:
-
Managing perception vs reality
-
Restoring confidence after regression
-
Prioritizing stability under pressure
-
Communicating effectively during setbacks
-
Leading through uncertainty
Students must demonstrate:
-
Emotional intelligence
-
Communication discipline
-
Strategic prioritization
-
Leadership under pressure
Key Insight
A technically correct decision can still damage stakeholder confidence.
Success is not just:
-
Building the right system
It is also:
-
Maintaining belief in the system
This scenario reinforces:
Trust is as critical as delivery.